A Order of rotations due to torque in 3DOF in simulations

AI Thread Summary
In a CFD simulation involving a symmetrical rigid body constrained to rotate in three degrees of freedom, the orientation after one second can be determined by calculating angular accelerations from the applied torque. The torque equations must use the moment of inertia in the local coordinate system to avoid confusion with global coordinates. When rotating the body, the order of applying rotation matrices matters due to their non-commutative nature; however, small angle approximations may allow for some flexibility in this context. If forces are also applied at the center of gravity, they will affect the body's position but not the rotation formulation directly. Understanding the conversion from angular velocity to rotation matrices or quaternions is essential for accurate orientation updates at each time step.
zonexo
Messages
1
Reaction score
2
TL;DR Summary
What is the orientation of a body rotating in 3 axes after t=1sec, using very small rotations to each time step
Hi,

I am running a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulation. Supposed I have a symmetrical rigid body in space experiencing torque in the global x,y,z axes. It is stationary at t = 0. I also constrain it to only allow rotations in 3DOFs, and no translation.

It will rotate and I need to know its orientation after t = 1s.

Each time step is 1e-5s. And I can get the torque at each time step. So 1st I need to obtain the angular accelerations (alpha) in the global x,y,z axes. I understand that torque folllows: torque_x/y/z = I_xx/yy/zz*alpha_x/y/z

So I can get alpha_x/y/z. Then I can then get the auglar vel and the angle rotated.

But how should I rotate the body to its new orientation at each time step? If I'm using rotational matrix R_x, R_y, R_z (or even quaterions), should the total rotation matrix by R_x*R_y*R_z or R_z*R_y*R_x? Because I thought matrices are not commutative, so would the body get a different orientation if I use different combinations? But there should only be a single correction orientation after the body experienced torque combination in the 3 axes.

At each time step (1e-5s), the angles rotated are small, so does it mean the rotation matrics can be commutative and so it doesn't matter?

Supposed at each time step, the angles at each axis are rotated 0.0001deg, what will be the final orientation of the body at t = 1s? Will it be the same as either using R_x*R_y*R_z or R_z*R_y*R_x and rotating by 10deg (since 0.0001*10000 time steps = 10deg)?

Lastly, if I also include forces acting at the body's CG, would it make any difference to the above rotation formulation (besides the body translating to a new position)?

Hope someone can clarify my doubts. Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
zonexo said:
1st I need to obtain the angular accelerations (alpha) in the global x,y,z axes. I understand that torque folllows: torque_x/y/z = I_xx/yy/zz*alpha_x/y/z
Careful here: I_xx/yy/zz is usually given in the local system of the body, where it is constant. Make sure you are not mixing global and local systems in this equation.

zonexo said:
Then I can then get the auglar vel and the angle rotated.

But how should I rotate the body to its new orientation at each time step?
The angular velocity is a vector, which is along the instantaneous rotation axis. So you need something to convert from axis-angle to matrix or to quaternion:
https://www.euclideanspace.com/maths/geometry/rotations/conversions/angleToMatrix/index.htm
https://www.euclideanspace.com/maths/geometry/rotations/conversions/angleToQuaternion/index.htm
 

Thread '1:1 versus 2:1 Mechanical Advantage debate'

The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
View full post »

Thread 'Newton's first law?'

Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
View full post »
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
View full post »

Similar threads

Rotations in Bloch Sphere about an arbitrary axis
Replies
3
Views
5K
3D Rotations - Confused with multiple rotations
Replies
11
Views
16K
Component of angular momentum perpendicular to rotation axis
Replies
1
Views
2K
Why Does the Moment of Inertia Change in Torque-Free Rotation?
Replies
3
Views
2K
Calculate a specific boost and rotation
Replies
16
Views
2K
How to simulate rotational stability of multiple parts?
Replies
6
Views
3K
Moment of inertia and force needed to tilt/change axis of rotation
Replies
1
Views
5K
Why do the works of two objects in rotation differ when friction is present?
Replies
5
Views
2K
Rotational Spring Arbitrary Motion
Replies
1
Views
2K
Why do rotating bodies continue to spin without an external torque?
Replies
3
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top